From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Philipp Stephani Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Dynamic loading progress Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 22:42:30 +0000 Message-ID: References: <87io5bv1it.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87egfzuwca.fsf@lifelogs.com> <876118u6f2.fsf@lifelogs.com> <8737w3qero.fsf@lifelogs.com> <831tbn9g9j.fsf@gnu.org> <878u5upw7o.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83ziya8xph.fsf@gnu.org> <83y4du80xo.fsf@gnu.org> <837fld6lps.fsf@gnu.org> <564F69F1.1030305@cs.ucla.edu> <564F8355.2070806@cs.ucla.edu> <564F89CC.403@cs.ucla.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114b07d4c35d5b052500978b X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1448059369 29851 80.91.229.3 (20 Nov 2015 22:42:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 22:42:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: aurelien.aptel+emacs@gmail.com, tzz@lifelogs.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert , Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 20 23:42:48 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZzuOF-00028C-DI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 20 Nov 2015 23:42:47 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50204 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZzuOE-0000Ma-PP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 20 Nov 2015 17:42:46 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36022) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZzuOB-0000MA-BV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Nov 2015 17:42:44 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZzuOA-00064m-GP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Nov 2015 17:42:43 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-wm0-x230.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::230]:37186) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZzuO8-00064Y-Jk; Fri, 20 Nov 2015 17:42:40 -0500 Original-Received: by wmww144 with SMTP id w144so38764777wmw.0; Fri, 20 Nov 2015 14:42:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=rnCMdkcV+uag/3u9v7MXiJdj0wQsXh6USzXl1KF3RL0=; b=lhXVwCyGYhPP/sMhODGqH9dsdLJFuqoYal+0yiEtvEdCNyACeLVD1N/SqtF2pJ9qMI tFNapza0HyxAqd7ks3Zq/JdarKHBWCU8lCjwR1HOLGDZjTeELQyntgu+hmNuMouUDTkm UclyOXvZTs5t2RFKUyEVxkINkbV+PhdGtnIuXIKludYdXTQG3izMsOOHFDGpHL4RHxjU ijOi5DGP4A2KIhgaTyeXjTWYSPoE8CfrkT6OAxVESQwcuM6gFYvBbmBvjdwMJnQjKAkv 24IFyeZMn1vPMIDu8rX5V4FjiARlM9OHwi0rgFtUJK4qIhBJL4WHKqcFyrTNhvyMc7/0 AeQA== X-Received: by 10.28.187.4 with SMTP id l4mr2309116wmf.33.1448059359941; Fri, 20 Nov 2015 14:42:39 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <564F89CC.403@cs.ucla.edu> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:400c:c09::230 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:194907 Archived-At: --001a114b07d4c35d5b052500978b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Paul Eggert schrieb am Fr., 20. Nov. 2015 um 21:59 Uhr: > Philipp Stephani wrote: > > intmax_t could differ between compilers even on the > > same machine, which would silently break compatibility. > > Doesn't sound very likely. Maybe not likely, but not impossible. > intmax_t is hardwired into the C library. If > compilers disagree about its size, printf would stop working. It would still be possible to link against different C libraries. (However, that would probably break in other places.) > Any > incompatibility this extreme would require treating the different > compilers like > we treat any other differences in platform: you need to recompile your > module. > That might be true, though I'd like to wait for Daniel's assessment: as said, he felt quite strongly about not using intmax_t. --001a114b07d4c35d5b052500978b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Paul E= ggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> = schrieb am Fr., 20. Nov. 2015 um 21:59=C2=A0Uhr:
Philipp Stephani wrote:
> intmax_t could differ between compilers even on the
> same machine, which would silently break compatibility.

Doesn't sound very likely.

Maybe not li= kely, but not impossible.
=C2=A0
=C2=A0 intmax_t is hardwired into the C library.=C2=A0 If
compilers disagree about its size, printf would stop working.
<= div>
It would still be possible to link against different C l= ibraries. (However, that would probably break in other places.)
= =C2=A0
=C2=A0 Any
incompatibility this extreme would require treating the different compilers= like
we treat any other differences in platform: you need to recompile your modu= le.

That might be true, though I'd = like to wait for Daniel's assessment: as said, he felt quite strongly a= bout not using intmax_t.=C2=A0
--001a114b07d4c35d5b052500978b--